About your Search

20130512
20130520
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
, the a.p. reported that a c.i.a. operation in yemen had foiled an al qaeda plot to bomb an airliner bound for the u.s. that same day a.p. reporter adam goldman spoke to the newshour's kwame holman about the decision to publish >> you had been in discussions with the u.s. government about holding the story and decidetog. the government did not want this story reporedolleagues and i learned about this plot as it was unfolding. and we agreed for national security reasons that we would not publish once those concerns passed we decided today that the public had a right to know that the u.s. had thwarted what we considered to be a very serious plot against aviation. >> woodruff: the justice department has not confirmed that story is the focus of the investigation and the white house, jay corny would not give specifics. >> i can't comment on the specifics but i can tell you the president feels strongly that we need a -- the press to be able to be unfettered in its pursuit of investigative journalism. he is also mindful of the need for secret and classified information to remain secret and classi
times as he down played what the c.i.a. was putting in the report, what they actually came out with, who was to blame for the conclusions that proved to be faulty. >>steve: any time there is a question asked of jay carney and it is something prepared for, if you notice, he reads a card off the top of his lectern. he's got things he's supposed to say. he is just the mouthpiece for this administration. it is the job of the white house press corps to ask the really tough questions. it is interesting because people are starting to wake up in the mainstream media -- thank goodness. maureen dowd yesterday wrote the administration's behavior before and during the attack in benghazi in which four americans died was unworthy of the greatest power on earth. there were other people in the mainstream media going we kind of trusted these guys. maybe we shouldn't have. >>brian: pickering is pushing back hard. former secretary of defense gates yesterday came forward. he said if i was secretary of defense, i wouldn't have sent an f-16 over there because i was afraid shoulder fire missiles might take the
of his disguise allegedly trying to recruit a russian for the cia. 29-year-old ryan fogle, a junior level diplomat caught with sunglasses, maps, money, offering up to $1 million a year, instructions for opening a gmail account. russians released him to the u.s. embassy. he'll probably be sent home. at washington's spy museum a former cia spy says it happens all the time. >> i've used disguise. sometimes something as simple as a wig and glasses will do that. even though it may look sort of corny, or sixth grade to people, it can work. >> reporter: russians call it provocative. u.s. officials don't believe it will set back communications, the boston bombing and standoff in syria. secretary of state meeting with russian counterpart in sweden, presumably not trading spy story. for "today," andrea mitchell, nbc news, washington. >>> the widow of the boston bombing suspect tamerlan tsarnaev will cooperate with investigators according to new attorney that has defended several suspects before. russell has not been charged but the legal team has yet to release details of what she saw in the days l
there was no there-there. on friday we learned the cia talking points went through 12 rounds of changes with the heavier than usual previously thought involvement of the state doe apartment and the white house. that it was outlined in a series of e-mails. here's what the president had to say about it all today. >> the whole issue of this, of talking points, frankly throughout this process has been a sideshow. the e-mails that you allude to were provided by us to congressional committees. suddenly three days ago, this gets spun up as if there's something new to the story. there's no there-there. and the fact that this keeps on getting churned out, frankly, has a lot to do with political motivations. we've had folks who have challenged hillary clinton's integrity, susan rice's integrity, mike mullen and tom pickering's integrity. it's a given that mine gets challenged by these same folks. they've used it for fund-raising. >> was the president right? is the issue of how the talking points were changed a political sideshow? u.s. congressman michael turner is on the oversight and government
of benghazi. that's a non-scandal. basically it was a turf war between the c.i.a. and the state department and the see jay began to walk back some of their allegations. i still there's a benghazi issue on why we didn't send support troops when ambassador stevens and others were in trouble. that issue when no action was taken that could have averted some catastrophe. i think that part remains an issue. >> i think that's a legitimate area of inquiry. but i think the real problem, judy, that faces -- judy, the federal government -- if you're going to make a case for it, it abolished slavery, it ended segregation, it built the land grant colleges that have produced more nobel prize winners than all the universities of europe combined. it saved the great lakes. it took 99% of the lead out of the air. it took wanton terror out of old age through social security. there's a case to be made for government and when government -- confidence in government and its integrity and competence is undermined, i think it's up to the president to rise to its defense and to say anybody who does this and threate
. the leak harmed a cia operation. it wanted to find out where the leak came from. they got those phone records. is that legal? how much freedom are we able to give up for so-called security? judge andrew napolitano is here. a slippery slope. did the justice department get a warrant from a judge to go get those records? >> well, we do not know, but we assumed by statements made that they use the patriot act authority which allows authorities to write their own search warrants as british soldiers were able to do prior to the american revolution -- stuart: yes, yes, yes. >> it directly contradicts the fourth amendment. they do not go to a judge, they do not present evidence of probable cause. agent a authorized agent be to do it. they show up within agent written search warrant. they serve it on the telephone company and the telephone company says, here are all the bills, telephone calls made and telephone calls received. stuart: could you make the case? it reaches the constitutional principle. >> yes. stuart: could you make a pragmatic case that the government needed this? they could det
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)